Any votes out there for 210mm lenses that have ample coverage for 8x10?

Fred L

1-Jan-2009, 10:19

Fujinon W 210, has to have lettering inside front rim.

Jim Becia

1-Jan-2009, 10:29

I know that the Graphic/Kowa covers, also the Computar ( Computar coverage - 325 is what I have found online). I don't know the exact figures for the Graphic Kowa, maybe someone will chime in with the those figures. Also, a G-Claron will cover also even though the coverage is stated at 260. Jim

ljsegil

1-Jan-2009, 11:30

Goerz Series III Doppel Anastigmat f/6.8 without much movement at all and stopped down a bit. Tendency to flare, but lovely images.
LJS

Peter K

1-Jan-2009, 12:10

Schneider Super-Angulon f/8 210mm with an image circle of 500m. But not for the weak camera.

Michael Nagl

1-Jan-2009, 12:12

Super Symmar XL of course.

Ole Tjugen

1-Jan-2009, 12:26

Schneider Angulon 210/6.8 is great. Weighs about a ton less than the Super-Angulon.

Jason Greenberg Motamedi

1-Jan-2009, 12:31

I use a 210/9 Computar. It just (and I mean just) covers 11x14, so it has loads of sharp coverage for 8x10; more than my Deardorff can stretch. It is also tiny and sharp. I have also used a 210mm Angulon (not SA) which was larger, had slightly more coverage (this is really not an issue for 8x10, only for 11x14), but was not quite as sharp (this is also not an issue if you are contact printing).

Two problems with the Computar, they are not so easy to find, so recommending them is questionable. Also--and this is not quantifiable like coverage or sharpness--the out of focus rendering can be unpleasant. The bokeh is similar to a G-Claron, very busy. Of course if you are using f64 you can ignore this...

Eric Leppanen

1-Jan-2009, 14:03

Here is what I have been able to glean about coated 210mm 8x10 lenses, which have some wiggle-room for movements:

Regarding image circles: "reportedly" refers to IC's empirically measured by lens owners, which I have used for lenses where I can't find the manufacturer's original spec. Otherwise I have used manufacturers' reported IC's (which in some cases might be a bit conservative compared with empirically measured IC's).

The Graphic Kowa, Computar and Fuji W are popular and rare due to their small size and generally adequate coverage for many applications. The remaining lenses are relatively easier to come by if you are patient.

I use a smaller 210mm lens for landscape use (Sironar W in my case, since I prefer focusing at f/5.6) and a larger high coverage optic for architecture (200 Grandagon, which I prefer to the other large 210mm lenses due to its light fall off properties).

Bob Salomon

1-Jan-2009, 14:30

Here is what I have been able to glean about coated 210mm 8x10 lenses, which have some wiggle-room for movements:

Regarding image circles: "reportedly" refers to IC's empirically measured by lens owners, which I have used for lenses where I can't find the manufacturer's original spec. Otherwise I have used manufacturers' reported IC's (which in some cases might be a bit conservative compared with empirically measured IC's).

The Graphic Kowa, Computar and Fuji W are popular and rare due to their small size and generally adequate coverage for many applications. The remaining lenses are relatively easier to come by if you are patient.

I use a smaller 210mm lens for landscape use (Sironar W in my case, since I prefer focusing at f/5.6) and a larger high coverage optic for architecture (200 Grandagon, which I prefer to the other large 210mm lenses due to its light fall off properties).

The Rodenstock Apo Sironar S 210mm also covers 810 with a very small rated bit (couple of mm) left over at F22 at infinity.

Eric Leppanen

1-Jan-2009, 16:11

The Rodenstock Apo Sironar S 210mm also covers 810 with a very small rated bit (couple of mm) left over at F22 at infinity.My list was intended to include lenses which support some room for movements on 8x10. The 210mm APO Sironar-S coverage on 8x10 is so tight that effectively no movements are possible; Kerry Thalmann does not recommend it for regular use on 8x10 for that reason (see his post http://www.largeformatphotography.info/forum/showthread.php?p=89160).

Similarly, the 210mm APO Symmar L is rated to cover 8x10 (its rated IC is slightly larger than that of the Sironar-S: 321mm vs 316mm), but again its coverage is so limited that no real movements are possible, plus there is enough light fall off at the corners that I don't recommend its use on 8x10 with chrome film (B&W and color neg are tolerable).

Ole Tjugen

1-Jan-2009, 16:36

The 210mm Angulon fits a Compound III/7, not a Copal 3.

Really Big Cameras

1-Jan-2009, 17:32

The 210mm Angulon fits a Compound III/7, not a Copal 3.

Actually, late samples of the 210mm Angulon came factory mounted in Copal No. 3 shutters. I used to own one. I'll see if I can dig up a photo of it.

Here it is:

http://www.thalmann.com/Ebay/210_Angulon.jpg

Kerry Thalmann
Really Big Cameras (http://reallybigcameras.com)

Really Big Cameras

1-Jan-2009, 18:13

The Rodenstock Apo Sironar S 210mm also covers 810 with a very small rated bit (couple of mm) left over at F22 at infinity.

That's true, but the OP asked about "210mm lenses that have ample coverage for 8x10". I'd hardly consider a 316mm image circle ample coverage for 8x10. I suppose it depends on how you define ample coverage, but to me that implies enough coverage for at least modest to moderate movements.

Eric did a great job summarizing several of the available options. For me, I use a 210mm Graphic-Kowa mounted in a Copal No. 1 press shutter when weight is a concern. This combination is tiny and light (209g = 7.4 oz.), but has an image circle of about 380mm.

When weight isn't as much of a concern, I use the 210mm APO Sironar-W. It's multicoated and at f5.6 is a breeze to focus and compose on the ground glass. The 210mm Super Symmar is a superb performer, but a bit on the big and heavy size - although not nearly as huge as the 210mm Super Angulon or 200mm Grandagon.

Kerry Thalmann
Really Big Cameras (http://reallybigcameras.com)

goodfood

1-Jan-2009, 18:58

I use 210mm Apo Symmar, just cover 8X10. It's lighter and lower price than other lenses have bigger coverage.

Gregory Ng

1-Jan-2009, 22:02

Wollensak 210 WFGR f6.8 - image circle 15 inches AFAIK.

erie patsellis

1-Jan-2009, 23:14

I'd second Ole's recommendation of the 210 Angulon, reasonably priced and more than ample coverage.

bulrich

2-Jan-2009, 08:59

Thanks all, this is very helpful. I generally use Schneider lenses but this provides some good options to the very pricy Super Symmar.
Working with mostly color neg and often at night or indoors as of late so flare can be an issue. Do prefer more coverage as I'm also doing a lot of architectural stuff.

Mark Sawyer

2-Jan-2009, 11:41

Just a note that the 210mm f/6.8 Dagor and 215mm f/4.8 Ilex Acuton/Caltar-S cover 8x10, but with only a little left for movements, so probably not what you're looking for.

bulrich

2-Jan-2009, 19:15

Anyone have problems with some of the older lenses not being MC when shooting color?

Vaughn

2-Jan-2009, 19:51

Wollensak 210 WFGR f6.8 - image circle 15 inches AFAIK.

I works fine with my 8x10...barrel lens. A nice little lens to work with!

The 210 G Claron starts covering 8x10 at about f/16. As you continue stopping down the usable coverage continues to increase until you actually get adequate coverage for many subjects at f22 and very ample coverage for most subjects around f/45 and smaller. I never found diffraction to be a problem with 8x10 film because the enlargement factor is usually so small (e.g. even 4x produces a very big print). I've owned two 210 G Clarons used for 8x10 and liked them a lot, especially when compared with the price and weight of some other 210s that cover 8x10. I mostly photographed landscapes and architecture with mine and don't remember ever running out of coverage.

mccormickstudio

2-Jan-2009, 23:22

B - I've been eyeballing most of these lenses for about a year, and I think I'm about to try the Wollensak 159mm. Single-coated, it could have problem with flare.

On fleabay, the least expensive and most available of these seems (to me) to be the angulon 210 with 362mm image circle, might just work at full front rise, barely... about $630 on ebay now. The older super angulon 165mm is usually about $800, I don't know if it's mc. Most of the really good ones... over $1k.

I use a fuji 210 W (not the older, wider version with printing on the inside) on some of the eastgate shots you saw where the cone is visible. They have almost no shift at all.

I guess you need to do some mathematics on the $ value of no lensflare vs. $2k super angulon mc. Or the $/hour of digital editing. yikes.

Shot more peopleboxes this week. Happy new year!.

Nick_3536

3-Jan-2009, 00:20

Fuji W are popular and rare due to their small size and generally adequate coverage for many applications. The remaining lenses are relatively easier to come by if you are patient.

.

The Fuji isn't that rare. It shows up fairly often. KEH and Mpex have them usually for not much money. The problem is making sure you get the older model. Mpex I find better at making clear what you're getting. With KEH you need to look more at the clues often. Filter size for example.

Carsten Wolff

3-Jan-2009, 00:58

Dare I mention the 8" f6.5 Cooke VIIB W.A. Anastigmat (again)? Coverage is stated as 100deg @f32 and 90deg @ f16. I've had an uncoated 158mm Cooke until recently and still have a nice 108mm, coated, Copal 0 version (most were originally in barrel or front-mounted in Epsilon shutters)... But they are a bit rare and thus usually quite expensive, although they are small and have very good coverage... Still, for the price, I would probably look for something else.

AJ Edmondson

3-Jan-2009, 15:21

I have both a 165 and a 210 Angulon - both single-coated - which I used a lot when I was backpacking 8x10 and both of them seemed to be great performers the few times I shot transparencies. Most of my experience with them was B&W.

BennehBoy

21-Jan-2009, 07:25

I'm looking for a good option for shooting indoors in relatively confined spaces (think UK inside peoples homes), what would people suggest for that, I was thinking I might need to get a 150 SS XL, but would much rather avoid that level of expense.

Ben Syverson

3-Feb-2009, 12:18

I've seen 210mm Angulons mounted in a Copal 1, but most are Copal 3... What gives?

DeBone75

3-Feb-2009, 16:52

I have a 213 Repromaster barrel lens that is said to have a 400mm circle. 8X10 with plenty of room. Kind of slow though, f9. There is one in auction right now, not mine.

Ben Syverson

3-Feb-2009, 17:30

That Repromaster looks interesting... can it be mounted in a shutter?

Larry Menzin

3-Feb-2009, 18:48

I just found a 210mm F8 Super Angulon. This has to about the heaviest lens out there. I think it's the earlier single-coated version that weighs in at about 2.3kg. The final version exceeded 3kg. Who needs to lift weights to stay in shape!

DeBone75

3-Feb-2009, 18:53

That Repromaster looks interesting... can it be mounted in a shutter?
I think I read it can. Don't know what shutter in though. Mines not. SK Grimmes would be the ticket.

Ben Syverson

4-Feb-2009, 00:18

3kg? That's more than my entire 8x10 setup! :)

Nick_3536

4-Feb-2009, 00:31

That Repromaster looks interesting... can it be mounted in a shutter?

If you have the money it can be mounted.

The question should be is it worth the cost to mount. Shutter plus everything else. A new shutter alone is more then some of the lenses mentioned.

Ben Syverson

4-Feb-2009, 20:49

That's what I'm thinking... I might wind up just snapping up a Angulon 210 f/6.8.

bulrich

8-Feb-2009, 20:51

I ended up getting an Fuji older W from Mpex. Only used it a few times so far but a fantastic lens! Great coverage for 8x10 and sharp as hell.
Thx. for all your help.

Larry Menzin

9-Feb-2009, 06:42

I just got my 210mm Super Angulon and I'm discovering the uses of a 500mm image circle. Used 50mm of rise with ease. The extra coverage is well worth the weight (at least for me).